Change the syntax of the malloc and free commands in lldb-test's
ir-memory-map subcommand to:
<malloc> ::= <label> = malloc <size> <alignment>
<free> ::= free <label>
This should make it easier to read and extend tests in the future, e.g
to test IRMemoryMap::WriteMemory or double-free behavior.
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47646
llvm-svn: 333930
It's been pointed out in https://reviews.llvm.org/D47646 that lldb-test
fails to create a usable process on Windows when running this test.
llvm-svn: 333785
This adds a new command to the ir-memory-map tester:
free <allocation-index>
The argument to free is an index which identifies which live allocation
to free. Index 0 identifies the first live allocation in the address
space, index 1 identifies the second, etc. where the allocations are
sorted in increasing order.
For illustrative purposes, assume malloc returns monotonically
increasing addresses. Here are some examples of how free would work:
Example 1
---------
malloc 16 1
malloc 32 1
free 1 //< Free the 32-byte allocation.
free 0 //< Next, free the 16-byte allocation.
Example 2
---------
malloc 16 1
malloc 32 1
free 0 //< Free the 16-byte allocation.
free 0 //< Next, free the 32-byte allocation.
llvm-svn: 333700
r333583 introduced testing for IRMemoryMap's process-side allocations
(eAllocationPolicyProcessOnly). This adds support for the host-side
variety (eAllocationPolicyHostOnly).
llvm-svn: 333698
This prevents Malloc from allocating the same chunk of memory twice, as
a byproduct of an alignment adjustment which gave the client access to
unallocated memory.
Prior to this patch, the newly-added test failed with:
$ lldb-test ir-memory-map ... ir-memory-map-overlap1.test
...
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=32)
Malloc: address = 0x1000cd080
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=8)
Malloc: address = 0x1000cd0b0
Malloc error: overlapping allocation detected, previous allocation at [0x1000cd080, 0x1000cd0c0)
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47551
llvm-svn: 333697
This teaches lldb-test how to launch a process, set up an IRMemoryMap,
and issue memory allocations in the target process through the map. This
makes it possible to test IRMemoryMap in a targeted way.
This has uncovered two bugs so far. The first bug is that Malloc
performs an adjustment on the pointer returned from AllocateMemory (for
alignment purposes) which ultimately allows overlapping memory regions
to be created. The second bug is that after most of the address space on
the host side is exhausted, Malloc may return the same address multiple
times. These bugs (and hopefully more!) can be uncovered and tested for
with targeted lldb-test commands.
At an even higher level, the motivation for addressing these bugs is
that they can lead to strange user-visible failures (e.g, variables
assume the wrong value during expression evaluation, or the debugger
crashes). See my third comment on this swift-lldb PR for an example:
https://github.com/apple/swift-lldb/pull/652
I hope lldb-test is the right place to add this testing harness. Setting
up a gtest-style unit test proved too cumbersome (you need to recreate
or mock way too much debugger state), as did writing end-to-end tests
(it's hard to write a test that actually hits a buggy path).
With lldb-test, it's easy to read/generate the test input and parse the
test output. I'll attach a simple "fuzz" tester which generates failing
test cases to the Phab review. Here's an example:
```
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=32)
Malloc: address = 0xca000
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca400
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca440
Command: malloc(size=16, alignment=8)
Malloc: address = 0xca840
Command: malloc(size=2048, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xcb000
Command: malloc(size=64, alignment=32)
Malloc: address = 0xca860
Command: malloc(size=1024, alignment=16)
Malloc: address = 0xca890
Malloc error: overlapping allocation detected, previous allocation at [0xca860, 0xca8a0)
```
{F6288839}
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D47508
llvm-svn: 333583
Instead of applying the sledgehammer of refusing to insert any
C++ symbol in the ASTContext, try to validate the decl if what
we have is an operator. There was other code in lldb which was
responsible for this, just not really exposed (or used) in this
codepath. Also, add a better/more comprehensive test.
<rdar://problem/35645893>
llvm-svn: 328025
Typical example, illformed comparisons (operator== where LHS and
RHS are not compatible). If a symbol matched `operator==` in any
of the object files lldb inserted a generic function declaration
in the ASTContext on which Sema operates. Maintaining the AST
context invariants is fairly tricky and sometimes resulted in
crashes inside clang (or assertions hit).
The real reason why this feature exists in the first place is
that of allowing users to do something like:
(lldb) call printf("patatino")
even if the debug informations for printf() is not available.
Eventually, we might reconsider this feature in its
entirety, but for now we can't remove it as it would break
a bunch of users. Instead, try to limit it to non-C++ symbols,
where getting the invariants right is hopefully easier.
Now you can't do in lldb anymore
(lldb) call _Zsomethingsomething(1,2,3)
but that doesn't seem to be such a big loss.
<rdar://problem/35645893>
llvm-svn: 327356
This test is consistently reporting unexpected pass for me, and the
expectedFailure decorator was removed from the legacy test in r310626.
Apply the same change to the lit version of this test.
Will investigate further if this fails once the new buildbot is running
tests.
llvm.org/pr17807
llvm-svn: 325856
Before this patch, LLDB was not able to evaluate expressions that
resulted in a value with a typeof- or decltype-type. This patch fixes
that.
Before:
(lldb) p int i; __typeof__(i) j = 1; j
(typeof (i)) $0 =
After:
(lldb) p int i; __typeof__(i) j = 1; j
(typeof (i)) $0 = 1
Differential revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D43471
rdar://37461520
llvm-svn: 325568
Summary:
This patch supplies basic infrastructure for LLDB to use LIT, and ports a few basic test cases from the LLDB test suite into LIT.
With this patch the LLDB lit system is not capable or intended to fully replace the existing LLDB test suite, but this first patch enables people to write lit tests for LLDB.
The lit substitution for %cc and %cxx default to the host compiler unless the CMake option LLDB_TEST_CLANG is On, in which case the in-tree clang will be used.
The target check-lldb-lit will run all lit tests including the lit-based executor for the unit tests. Alternatively there is a target generated for each subdirectory under the lit directory, so check-lldb-unit and check-lldb-expr will run just the tests under their respective directories.
The ported tests are not removed from the existing suite, and should not be until such a time when the lit runner is mature and in use by bots and workflows.
Reviewers: zturner, labath, jingham, tfiala
Subscribers: beanz, mgorny, lldb-commits
Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D24591
llvm-svn: 281651
Vedant Kumar